Shadow leadership tends to appear in organizations that have not created the roles, pathways, or decision structures needed for the work they expect people to carry. It shows up quietly. Someone becomes the person others turn to, not because the system formally positioned them that way, but because they are competent, reliable, and willing to fill the gap. Over time, that informal role becomes part of how the organization functions, even though nothing about it is supported by the structure.
When that happens, the individual may look like they are stepping into leadership (or higher levels of leadership), but the larger story is usually about the system. Research in organizational role theory makes this clear. When authority and responsibility are separated, people experience more conflict, more stress, and more errors (Katz and Kahn; Rizzo et al.). Teams begin to navigate mixed signals about who sets direction, who provides feedback, and who carries accountability. The environment becomes less predictable because the authority that guides work is implied rather than defined.
Shadow leadership also creates a workload and compensation problem. Job creep studies from Gallup and the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development show that when organizations expand someone’s duties without updating the role or the support around it, burnout rates climb and retention drops. People end up absorbing labor the system has not staffed or funded, and this becomes even more pronounced in environments where the work already carries significant emotional or cognitive load.
Leadership development suffers in this kind of setting. Organizations that depend on informal leaders delay the work of building an actual leadership pipeline. McKinsey’s research on capability gaps describes how many workplaces lean on “accidental leaders” because it feels easier in the moment than fixing structural issues. The pattern eventually weakens the broader system. When leadership is unofficial, development is unofficial as well. Learning, support, and authority never align.
There is also a psychological impact. Informal leadership often brings the pressure of guiding people without the clarity, boundaries, or protections that formal roles provide. Studies in the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology describe this as illegitimate work, meaning tasks that fall outside a person’s recognized responsibilities. The research consistently links it to increased strain and reduced job satisfaction. The emotional weight of being responsible for others without the corresponding authority or recognition is not a small thing.
Team culture becomes more complicated in the presence of shadow leadership. People recognize inconsistencies quickly. When someone functions as a leader without actually being positioned as one, the team experiences mixed expectations and uncertain reporting lines. Hackman and Wageman’s work on team effectiveness shows how quickly unclear authority can disrupt norms, interfere with coordination, and reduce psychological safety. Teams need coherence around who guides the work and how decisions get made.
Shadow leadership rarely forms because someone is seeking extra responsibility. It forms because the organization has not created a structure that matches the work it expects to see. When people feel pushed into these roles, it is a sign that the system needs attention rather than a sign that the individual should carry more.
Healthy organizations design for the leadership they need. They formalize responsibilities, clarify decision rights, create pathways for growth, and ensure that authority, accountability, and compensation move together. They avoid relying on invisible labor to hold the system together.
Shadow leadership is a message about the organization. It is important to pay attention to what that message is saying.
References
Gallup. (2023). State of the Global Workplace: 2023 Report. Gallup Press. Findings highlight the impact of workload expansion, burnout drivers, and the effects of unclear role expectations on employee well-being.
Hackman, J. R., & Wageman, R. (2005). A theory of team coaching. Academy of Management Review, 30(2), 269–287. Offers evidence on how unclear authority and competing sources of direction weaken team effectiveness.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. (Multiple studies, 2010–2023). Research on illegitimate tasks, role stress, and the psychological impact of task–role misalignment, including work by Semmer, T. and colleagues.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. (1978). The Social Psychology of Organizations (2nd ed.). Wiley. A foundational text on role theory, authority structures, and the consequences of unclear roles.
McKinsey & Company. (2020). Leadership for the future: Closing the capability gap. McKinsey Global Institute. Addresses the organizational risks of relying on informal or “accidental” leaders and the long-term impact on capability building.
Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., & Lirtzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15(2), 150–163. Classic research demonstrating how ambiguous or conflicting expectations increase stress and reduce effectiveness.
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD). (2022). Work Overload and Job Quality Report. CIPD Publishing. Documents the rise of job creep and expanded duties without structural support or updated roles.
Dr. Treca Bourne 